Cohen v Macefield P/L & Ors

[2010] QCA 95

Queensland Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Summary offences
3. › Information and complaint
4. › Duplicity
5. › Whether statutory provision creates single offence or two distinct offences
6. › Damaging or permitting to be damaged
7. › Whether objection based on duplicity can be raised for first time on appeal
8. › Justices Act 1886 (Qld), s 43
1. Criminal Law
2. › Summary offences
3. › Limitation periods
4. › Whether offence committed within limitation period
5. › Result offences
6. › Whether act and consequence must both occur within limitation period
7. › Local Government Act 1993 (Qld), s 1080
1. Practice and Procedure
2. › Costs
3. › Criminal proceedings
4. › Costs against prosecutor
5. › Discretion of court
6. › Whether acquitted defendant brought suspicion on herself
7. › Whether defendant unreasonably declined opportunity to explain
8. › Justices Act 1886 (Qld), s 158A(2)

Quick Take

Section 24(1) of Gold Coast City Council Local Law No. 6 creates two distinct offences — damaging protected vegetation and permitting damage — and charging both in a single count is duplicitous. While s 43(3)(b) of the Justices Act 1886 (Qld) permits a magistrate to proceed with a duplex complaint where no objection is taken, it does not authorise the recording of an ambiguous conviction that fails to identify the specific offence. For environmental damage offences involving poisoning, the offence is complete once interference with natural growth occurs, not when the tree eventually dies, and the prosecution must establish the offence was committed within the limitation period.